Antiferromagnetic/ferromagnetic coupling

  • Thread starter Thread starter qubits
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupling
qubits
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
What is antiferromagnetic/ferromagnetic coupling, and what is the difference between the two? I'm referring to coupling between two two-level half-flux quantum systems for example.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
qubits said:
What is antiferromagnetic/ferromagnetic coupling, and what is the difference between the two? I'm referring to coupling between two two-level half-flux quantum systems for example.

I'm assuming what you meant by "half-flux quantum systems" is spin 1/2 systems.

First of all, this is a VERY difficult subject that falls into quantum magnetism. So I'm guessing you're asking this because you're studying either quantum magnetism, or solid state physics. If that is the case, then the "coupling" is the Heisenberg spin-exchange interaction, defined within the Heisenberg spin Hamiltonian as

H = \sum_{ij}J_{ij}\mathbold{S_i} \cdot \mathbold{S_j}

where J_{ij} is the Heisenberg coupling of nearest-neighbor spins. In a "simple" system (pay attention to that word), a ferromagnetic coupling implies that J < 0, whereas antiferromagnetic coupling means that J > 0. The exact determination of what J is for any given system is usually impossible to find exactly. This is where one has to make approximations within the many-body picture.

Zz.
 
Last edited:
In any physical system we are concerned with energy lowering that leads to stability of the system. So the hamiltonian that is presented above H=sum (ij) J(ij) S(i).S(j) is a simplestic one illustrating the fact.

1.For a antiferromagnetic system neighbouring spins are opposite (+1/2) and (-1/2) so J is +ve that leads to an overall -ve sign>>> means H= -ve ( ... ) this hamiltonian will have -ve eigen energy leading to a bound state.

2.For ferromagnetic spins are (+1/2) (+1/2) so by similar argument J should be -ve...

This hamiltonian is simple but it hides the actual physics. The J cointains Coulomb and spin exchange terms within it...
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top